I have seen the future of the Larouche Org in Ferndale, Washington.

Circuitously, and having to shuffle past a tedious series of exchanges with the author of this Fine study, I found my way to clues to an answer to the questions that hover in the background for me — “What will become of the Larouche org after the man passes away, and what lasting memory will he leave?” — the same question.  It comes out of the question “Where in the world is Howard Scott”, as of today — in the year 2010? 

Wikipedia is an uneven and rough reflection of public historical memory.  Look into it and we see this spectacle of people ready to defend his character.

It is well known that Howard Scott was smeared in the press. You are republishing old information. Did you read the link I directed you to? I gave you a link that provided evidence. Why are you wholesale reverting everything ?
Why be a continuing part of a smear effort? Why try and assassinate this persons character. It is unseemly and really uncalled for. skip sievert (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

User Johnphos… Scott was smeared in the press, and you are dredging up that material now again, please do not use the Times link in this article on Scott. It is not sourced in the article. The article is a known designed attack on Howard Scott and includes things like this How this transformation from dollar economy to energy economy is to come about, Howard Scott never explains. Says he at times: “Technocracy proposes no solution.” At other times he silences questions with a pontifical belch That is the level of this unsourced anon article. Along with the Hearst corporation there was a concerted effort to make a fool and chide Scott in the press. skip sievert (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Obviously the article is meant to be a satire and not a serious piece. It has no author and came out after the Hearst corporation and others put out a directive to discredit the group. His early career is not notable at least the way you have measured or portrayed it. Obvious to see where the piece is aimed. Please do not add this again. Johnfos I have asked you previously not to disruptive edit or trail my edits. skip sievert (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I imagine the wikipedia article on “Technocracy Inc” clashes with Hyzoloic Hedgehog’s piece round about where it places the organization in the present day and fails to concur with a split.

Technocracy Incorporated’s headquarters were originally situated in New York. It has moved several times through its history, and is currently located in Ferndale, Washington. Howard Scott became the first Director of Technocracy Incorporated in 1933, a position he held until his death.[citation needed]

From “Monad Man”:  In spite of the majority’s adherence to Scott, the split devastated the movement. In 1951 Technocracy’s CHQ had to leave its offices in Manhattan and relocate first to Lambertsville, New Jersey, and then to a farm in Bucks County outside Philadelphia. Although some local Technocracy chapters continued to publish small journals, Scott’s CHQ issued its last pamphlet in the late 1940s. Scott sank into even deeper historical obscurity and when he died in 1970 his passing did not even merit a note in the New York Times.

Looking at the citations for the wikipedia article, I have no idea why the current website for “Technocracy, Inc” would delete its founding principles of 1933.  I suppose that you have to be pragmatic and can’t be ideologically driven to your principles in a society you did not create — even if you favor a “No Money Society“, you still have to sell stuff to pay the bills.

I have seen the future of the Larouche org.  It is a website where this is the most popular page — where predictions for 64 years ago are still rationalized away, and the main Ferndale, Washington branch has a sister locale in Vancouver, British Columbia.  It is a loop of appeals to the Youth to the FUTURE!

Technocracy is not a political movement. It is an organization with a dynamic plan for the future–a non-monetary system of distribution, managed by the people most qualified in their particular fields, not by politicians or financiers–we’ve already seen what they do.
We owe our standard at living to science and technology–in the hands of those who know how things work. In the wrong hands, we face an uncertain future. You owe it to yourself to look into Technocracy’s design. After all, that is where you will spend most of your life–in the future.

There are three wikipedia pages that directly concern Howard Scott and “Technocracy, Inc”.  Larouche enjoys a much larger wikipedia tree.  Absent the mass of Larouchites tacking away at wikipedia, I suspect the apparatus would collapse — not quite to the Scott and Technocracy, Inc — but only due to the fact that there are more outlets of information today than there was in the hey-day of the 1930s and 1940s, and more available.  Meantime, the wikipedia team of one for Technocracy, Inc appears to have faded.  A battle lost:

Skip, You’ve said here that “…Technocracy Incorporated and its program.. is perhaps the most important social movement of the 20th. century in my opinion… it influenced and continues to influence many… and was the fastest growing social movement of the early to mid 1930’s.” skip sievert (talk) 14:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC) And this is the general position presented in this article.

But where is the actual evidence that TI has been so important and influential? Perhaps there are some New York Times articles and scholarly books by disinterested historians about TI? Many more third party publications are needed to support what is being said in this article. Sources close to the subject are not very helpful and I’ve tagged the TI Publications section as being an advertisement. Johnfos (talk) 09:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Skip Sievert has failed the Herschel Krustofsky test — he has not kept at it with new names, with a new tag-team (perhaps because the org only consists of one person in Ferndale?), from different isp locales, etc. to badger and bug the wikipedia editors.

In Larouche campaign news:
Summer Shields held an all day press conference in Chinatown on the 29th.  I’m sure it filtered into LPAC press releases.  The Summer Shields for Congress Chorus held a concert at St. Mary’s Square Park.  And this week, all are welcomed to join the U.S. Army Corp Bay Model Tour, and an Economic Policy Workshop on The Historical Development of California with special guest Mark Calney on Saturday, followed by a Conceptual Tour of San Francisco lead by Mark Calney on Sunday.

The Kesha Rogers campaign held a “Save the U.S.A. Layoff Obama!” Intersection Rally, and Ian Overton will lead a discussion of LaRouche’s September forecast on Saturday at Coffee Oasis.

The Rachel Brown campaign has received a bit of press, and a columinist calling for a debate with Barney Frank, here:
You may remember her as the person Frank likened to a dining room table at a Dartmouth town meeting last summer. According to her campaign website, Ms. Brown favors the impeachment of President Obama, in part because of what she calls his “Hitler healthcare policy.” She also advocates the American colonization of Mars. That’s Mars, the planet — not the candy company. I hope Frank debates her on live television.

But she will appear alongside the two Republican challengers to Barney Frank on Newton radio station NECN’s program “Broadside”, on Monday, August 2nd at 6pm.  For a suggested 25 dollar donation you can go to the Brookline Main Library to “participate in an evening of beauty, dignity, and joy in honor of the 200th birth year of Robert Schumann and the beautiful culture he fought to create” in fighting “the Obama administration and lackeys such as Barney Frank, are degrading and killing off the population.”  On Saturday, you too can meet Rachel Brown and dine on some pizza.

18 Responses to “I have seen the future of the Larouche Org in Ferndale, Washington.”

  1. John C. Says:

    Always a mistake to take anything in Wikipedia seriously. The economics and energy articles are controlled by factions and special interest gangs there.
    For more accurate information on biophysical economics or thermoeconomics look in this place http://www.technocracytechnate.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=699d9fa70fe9df419bac0c78cc9a4dbd;www

    Example of issues with Wikipedia http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AUfLP5xuRGeqZGZ4N3JmcjJfMzQwbm13M3dwY2I&hl=en Who Controls Wikipedia? Money does… George Soros is involved in ]funding it, among other mainstream pseudo groups.

    Another information site on the Technocracy technate design http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2205039391 <–Facebook

    There is zero connection between Larouche and Howard Scott or Technocracy technate groups or information.
    Energy accounting is a non political system.
    TechInc is a research and education group.
    Zero assumption to power theory involved in it.

  2. Justin Says:

    Questions. Questions. Bring you questions right here.

    What steps do you suggest someone in the 17 to 35 year old age group take if they wish to advance and work toward the vision articulated by Howard Scott oh so many decades ago?

    Wait. Hold on. I see a FAQ page. Answers the question. Kind of.
    We suggest that the best way to do this is to acquaint one’s self as fully as possible on all aspects of the problem, after which an objective solution will commence to suggest itself, While anyone can do this individually and alone if he has the integrity and interest to do so, it seems rather a waste of time to go over ground that has already been covered with the likely result that a similar conclusion would be reached to one that has already been widely publicized.

    We refer, of course, to Technocracy

    Question #2: Could you please finish the answer to this question?
    What are you going to do with the people who are not interested in Technocracy?

    If the question is asking what we intend to do with persons today who are not interested in Technocracy, the answer is

    I think it’s a pretty good stickling point that may prevent people from joining your movement.

  3. John C. Says:

    Mostly it is true though.
    We don’t care.
    People resonate with this or not.
    Mostly the info is too complicated for most people I guess.
    It really is not though. Its simple.

    Time will either bring us to the ideas though or we will destroy ourselves.
    That simple.
    Never was a cult… the original group was an early science biophysical thermoeconomics group… invented those ideas with energy accounting.

    This is a better information site than the one you were looking at http://www.technocracytechnate.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=699d9fa70fe9df419bac0c78cc9a4dbd;www

    Also this will help in understanding a lot of this http://mkinghubbert-technocracy.blogspot.com/

    Ignore that Faq’s thing from that site. It is the absolute worst of any written material produced by the group. It is thought that it will be deleted soon. Sorry about that info.

  4. John C. Says:

    More on the LaRouche thing. a friend who volunteered in the office in Ferndale mentioned that LaRouche… and this would have been probably in the 1960’s,… ordered almost all of our information as far as brochures etc.
    The person remarked on this because at the time we gave away that stuff in mailings and they ordered almost every bit of info we had. Free postage so it was a significant amount, so that it stuck in my friends mind.

    Probably if there is anything interesting about LaRouche, and if it seems like he has a limited but accurate perspective in a small way… that is the reason.

    But that guy is a political Price System flunky… so, like a lot of other people… took a tiny amount from something interesting and ran with it after dumbing it down… like the J. Fresco/Zeitgeist/ResourceBasedEconomics people. It sounds similar… but is not.
    The real thing written by Hubbert is here

    As far as getting involved… it is all volunteer and mostly the idea is to figure out what this thing is… and that requires accurate info… something missing from places like Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk: because of people like this, who formed a faction gang to control those articles… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Technocracy_Incorporated ‘Johnphos’ an editor there, even tried to delete the entire article… and almost did.
    He is a mainstream idiot … progressive liberal type with gangs of others that do that kind of thing on Wikipedia.
    E.o.E. is a much better source http://www.eoearth.org/article/Biophysical_economics
    People like this are mostly ego morons http://www.rbefoundation.com/grouptopic.php?f=420&t=2377
    Those people are NOT connected either and these are not http://www.eoslife.eu/
    Again Technocracy technate ideas are one thing, energy economics in a science system that gets rid of money and contract society.

  5. Justin Says:

    Mostly the info is too complicated for most people I guess.
    It really is not though. Its simple.

    Simple complicated or Complicated Simple?

    What does George Soros have against everyone such that wikipedia is a focal point of his disinformation campaign against everyone?

    Is this “Technocracy Inc” website affiliated or connected to a different organization than your “Technocracy Technate” website?

    In Detroit, in April 1960, Howard Scott was asked for “details” on how the changeover to a Technate would take place. Scott: “I suppose whoever wrote this question thinks we Technocrats are all right, and that we are going to install the Technate… Oh, no, we aren’t going to do a damn thing… We’re Consulting Engineers. We’ll draw the design — tentatively. It will not be complete in every detail — nothing as vast as this could be; but the people of this country have to do it. They’re going to do it — not the Technocrats… They can say. ‘Well, you turn left out here and then turn right, but that’s about the extent of our participation. If it gets tough enough, you’ll do it…’ No society has ever moved from foresight… It’s always been by compulsion after the roof fell in… If the public had that much sense, it would have been done long before we Technocrats went across this country trying to tell you what to do… In other words, you would have beaten us to it. The fact that you haven’t (The people of this country haven’t) proves how far out of the loop they really are.”
    If the Technate things have already been laid out in detail and they will happen when they do happen, what is the point of any further advocacy or action?

  6. John C. Says:

    This is the newer official TechInc website http://surepost.com/igdtech/technocracy/index.php
    This is the original group… yes, in Ferndale.

    This is another connected official site http://www.technocracyvan.ca/

    The TechnocracyTechnate.org site is just people connected that are presenting accurate info.
    The main group went through a slump and are trying to get better organized with the new site now.

    What ever Howard Scott or M. King Hubbert said is the model for this though.. They came up with it… especially Scott, and the Technocracy Study Course is not our ‘bible’… just an information source and definitive view of how this could work in the broad strokes aspect.

    That makes sure it is not just another Price System http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dfx7rfr2_82cb2rcg&hl=en#
    Some basic facts.

    Its simple. – 8th grade education will suffice for understanding this. Natures principles are not complicated. Brainwashing or people following what they think they already know is the problem.

    Keep in mind that you can ask questions here also http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2205039391

    ””””””’What does George Soros have against everyone such that wikipedia is a focal point of his disinformation campaign against everyone?”””””””

    No conspiracy… he is just another Price System advocate that ‘believes’ in the system.
    Just another ignorant growth guy… that is all. A flunky like the others… Gates,, Obama… McCain… etc.

    ”””””’Is this “Technocracy Inc” website affiliated or connected to a different organization than your “Technocracy Technate” website?””””””’

    The core information is exactly the same. Based on the Technocracy Study Course. As said though some poor writing was done in the last few years there by people not so educated, and that became a problem. They are reforming now and doing better.
    That old website as you saw really sucked.
    The newer one is better in presentation.
    http://surepost.com/igdtech/technocracy/index.php < give that one for info.

    Here is old stuff… all good from project Gutenberg http://web.archive.org/web/20010608185804/www.technocracyinc.org/pamphlets.htm

    And another file of that older info. http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfx7rfr2_348gjnjp6gp Master file of old things.

    This explains a lot of this also http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dfx7rfr2_55dh6wv9&hl=en
    Technate design… and Idea for Now.

  7. John C. Says:

    ””””””””If the Technate things have already been laid out in detail and they will happen when they do happen, what is the point of any further advocacy or action?””””””””’

    No one knows the future. We could end up in a fascist collapsed Price System that is called a democracy also.
    We just put out the information originally of how to have a secular humanistic society based on science.
    Something that has never been tried… but this has been tried over and over and will not work now… the old system is too flawed for a high energy civilization for a lot of reasons
    http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dfx7rfr2_109m3xbv3&hl=en The American Political Price System.
    That which ceases to function ceases to exist.
    We are pretty close to that now.

    We feel our solution is best… that is what makes a technocrat. It beats the chaos on the horizon if we do not adopt a plan like ours.
    We are close to meltdown again now. System no longer can grow. A Price System collapses without growth http://www.investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm

    The bottom supports the top in the caste or class system. Adam Smith economics from Sumer is now a dead letter because of the elimination of human labor … robotics … etc.
    So no purchasing power… no consumer society…
    Growth has stopped for the first time since World War two.

  8. Justin Says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk: because of people like this, who formed a faction gang to control those articles… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Technocracy_Incorporated ‘Johnphos’ an editor there, even tried to delete the entire article… and almost did.

    Looking at that, Johnphos didn’t come close to deleting that article. There are 4 keeps to 0 deletes to 1 “merge”. Johnphos even seems amenable to wavering on his original opinion.

    I’ve come full circle to my original question. There’s a certain fatuousness to declaring wikipedia a baromter for what counts as “public historical memory”, but a process of eking out “notability” and lines of reference material lay something out. Notice that “Technocracy, Inc” survived the deletion trial and “Technocracy Study Guide” did not — nor should it have (and nobody remembers it, or knew of its existence in the first place, even if advocates deem “Technocracy Incorporated and its program […]perhaps the most important social movement of the 20th. century”.

    I’ve read a number of anti-New Deal writers in the 1930s tie Roosevelt to the Technocracy Movement, and I read Walter Lippman’s favorabl-ish article during the brief hey-day for the movement — like a David Broder article in showing mainstream credence. This would’ve been before “Technocracy, Inc”.

    Maybe there are points to parse and things I want to inquire about the nature of these websites. If you don’t mind me asking, is there any story behind this comment?
    As said though some poor writing was done in the last few years there by people not so educated, and that became a problem. They are reforming now and doing better.


    In weird Larouche news:
    That should give these guys a sense of connectedness to their historic mission.

  9. John C. Says:

    I just find Larouche to be kind of a moron… sorry.
    He speaks in goobledy goop of fake classic reference points. He seems like an idiot to me. He is another reformer of the Price System.

    Yes I could on with stories about Techinc and might if you email me but not here, and we could talk on Skype or Goggle talk or something.

    As to Johphos… please don’t defend that idiot. He is symbolic of Wikipedia being for retards.

    Read the Technocracy section… scroll down… on this official social security website page… it is not actually totally accurate… but it is interesting and may give you more historic perspective
    Out of America’s fascination with technology came another eccentric “reform” movement known as Technocracy. Founded in 1918 by a California patent attorney it would briefly flare as a serious intellectual movement centered around Columbia University; although as a mass-movement its real center was California where it claimed half a million members in 1934. Technocracy counted among its admirers such men as the novelist H.G. Wells, the author Theodore Dreiser and the economist Thorstein Veblen.

    Technocracy held that all politics and all economic arrangements based on the “Price System” (i.e., based on traditional economic theory) were antiquated and that the only hope of building a successful modern world was to let engineers and other technology experts run the country on engineering principles. Technocracy’s rallying cry was “production for use,” which was meant as a contrast to production for profit in the capitalist system. Production for use became a slogan for many of the radical-left movements of the era. Upton Sinclair, among others, affirmed his belief in “production for use” and the Technocrats briefly made common cause with Sinclair, and even Huey Long, in California. But the Technocrats were not of the political left, as they held every political and economic system, from the left to the right, to be unsound.
    The Technocrats believed that the solution to all problems of economic security were the same, the rigorous application of engineering principles in a system freed from the Price System. They conceived of retirement as being made possible at age 45 for everyone due to the vast prosperity the new age of Technocracy would usher in. Rejecting all forms of traditional political science, the Technocrats refused to even use standard geographical maps because their boundaries were political, so they would refer to states only by their geographical coordinates. Names, too, were suspect for some reason so members of the movement in California were designated only by numbers. A speaker at one California rally was introduced only as 1x1809x56!

    Oddly enough, alone among this collection of radical movements of the 1930s, the Technocracy movement survives, if not quite thrives, into the present day.”””””””””””””””””””’ http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html Source.

  10. Justin Says:

    So Johphos is the Technocrats’ version of the Larouchies’ Will Beback and Slim Virgin?

    I don’t know what you’re getting at with the soc sec reference. Is that about it? I Gots that covered already.:

    Needless to say, the Administration established none of the Utopias promoted by this spectacular assortment of dreamers. It neither nationalized the banks nor erected a silver calf for public worship. It put no limit to any man’s fortune in order to make any other man a King. It set up no revolving pension scheme and doled out neither ham nor eggs on Thursdays. It continued to issue dollars and cents rather than joules and ergs and made no effort to turn over the country either to gentleman farmers or to feudal gentry out of a Plantagenet England. It established no cooperative villages and did not invest itself visibly in personal sin or the cultivation of green pastures with dinner.

    Yet somehow, in that mysteriously vapory way in which the democratic system bumbles along, all of these objectives, or almost all, found a reflection in Mr. Roosevelt’s New Deal. Gold did lose its magic and debtors’ burdens were eased, which was the idea. What with toughly progressive income taxes, collective bargaining, and minimum wage laws, the distribution of wealth did get a shaking up. Full employment and a rationalized economy became at least respectable government, even if engineers were not put in charge. Old age pensions did become a reality and thereafter could only grow in magnitude. And government organized cooperatives did electrify the farms, though they operated no villages. If nothing official was done about private sin, economic sin was at least for a time rendered unfashionable, and many found their pastures a little greener as a result of all the pottering in Washington. As for moving the country toward medievalism, it cannot honestly be argued that any progress was made, but otherwise it is fair to say that in all the raucous outcry of the Thirties no voice was wholly lost.

    From Robert Bendiner’s book “Just Around the Corner”, 1968.
    posted here June 20, 2009.

    What has been the history of Technocracy since — I don’t know a good date — but what has been achieved in the past couple of decades? When did Tech Inc set up shop in Ferndale? Is anyone writing anything new for any newly published journals of theory?

    Pretty slim staff. Any other physical locales? How big is the movement?

  11. John C. Says:

    The movement has been growing exponentially the last five years or so… because of the internet.

    Here is one of the best intro’s to it on video http://www.youtube.com/user/TBonePickensetc#p/a/u/2/I9ps5vJrIxM The seven part series.

    This is the initial public statement our group made in 1933 or 34 https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfx7rfr2_357gsgx2ptk A statement of the social objectives of Technocracy.

    How it is that people connect our group with Illuminati nonsense is unknown… but there is zero connection.
    Our stuff is on a totally different wavelength http://skepticwiki.org/images/8/83/NWO_org_chart.png

    Its not the Fed, its not the Jews, its not the Rothschilds… its not the Bank of England…. its the Price System and contract society http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dfx7rfr2_96tc8x77&hl=en
    Origin of the Political Price System.

    You can call George out there and chat with him on those questions… He is friendly.
    George Wright is out there as an organizer at Ferndale. His phone is on the website… give him a call… him or Paul Cordsmeyer would be in the office usually. They can send you printed material.
    Mostly it is mailed for free.
    You maybe could talk with Ron Miller also .. this guy http://www.youtube.com/user/TechnocracyInc2 in the vids. He is one of our official speakers.

    Mostly we are attracting really smart young people… my opinion anyway… from around 14 to 28 years old for the most part. People sick of fake alternative things… like Zeitgeist, political crap, fake solutions of reform.

  12. Justin Says:

    I thank you for answering my barrage of questions. I’ll let them percolate here.

  13. John C. Says:

    Lots of confusion surrounding issues connected with this group.
    Here is an interesting accidental piece of brilliance that may interest you.
    Just kind of fun.
    Not made by our group or members connected… interesting though.

  14. Justin Says:

    How it is that people connect our group with Illuminati nonsense is unknown… but there is zero connection.

    Posting here might have something to do with it:

  15. John C. Says:

    I doubt it.
    We are an educational and research group.
    That means we outreach to all types. Even the clueless ones.
    http://www.rbefoundation.com/grouptopic.php?f=420&t=2377 Like this group of non notable ego mongers for instance.

    No shortage of crazies on the internet…
    No connection to new age clap trap.

  16. Justin Says:

    I see in quick searching that a “Patrick Wood” thinks you are making head-way with the “Carbon Footprint” concerns:


    That’d be the ideological framework where groups would insert you into the “New World Order” or under the Illuminati.

    As for Zeitgiest (always struck me as an odd assortment and clearinghouse that rounded up various conspiracy theories and confidence men), I don’t know if Zeitgeist views you as good or bad

  17. John C. Says:

    Yeah funny.
    The Zeitgeist info. on Technocracy technate things claims it was a personality cult around Howard Scott.
    Thats funny and that is typical of groups with ax’s to grind that got information and then dumbed it down… and yes Peter Joseph is particularly clueless about J. Fresco… a guy that is trying to sell swampland in Florida with some ideas remotely connected.

    The carbon currency information is really laughable… almost like this kind of thing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF-zE1xFo7I
    Utter crazy internet stuff.

    Monetizing carbon is a ridiculous idea or using carbon to control people. Yes, it is odd that people are looking at our material that way.
    0 connection to our information though.

    The information is really very specific concerning the goals and aims of the original group http://www.archive.org/details/TechnocracyStudyCourseUnabridged
    That is all it is. A science based social design that gets rid of the Price System and uses energy accounting in a non contract society.

    Here is an accurate early history of the group written by Scott http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dfx7rfr2_10fqbv5t&hl=en History and Purpose of Technocracy

  18. Rob Says:

    Any accounting systems defeats any notion of a viable Technocracy because as we account for energy resources we’re automatically using a kind of scarcity determined commodity valuations system. Any resource that is scarce can be subjectively interpreted as being valuable and hence a price can be placed on any finite resource that we use for production, distribution and consumption.

    The only time a Technocracy becomes viable is when the resources we consume are abundant beyond our current capacity to account for.

    What are the potential energy resources that we could potential consume that are abundant beyond our ability and or willingness to account for?

    Well, how about electromagnetic power generation or perhaps a Nikola Tesla type of zero point energy resource?

Leave a Reply